From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S935257AbcJZVVa (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Wed, 26 Oct 2016 17:21:30 -0400
Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([146.0.238.70]:41820 "EHLO
        Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S932830AbcJZVV3 (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 26 Oct 2016 17:21:29 -0400
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 23:18:38 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <h.peter.anvin@intel.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Nilay Vaish <nilayvaish@gmail.com>, Shaohua Li <shli@fb.com>,
        David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@google.com>,
        Ravi V Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
        Sai Prakhya <sai.praneeth.prakhya@intel.com>,
        Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 10/18] x86/intel_rdt: Build structures for each resource
 based on cache topology
In-Reply-To: <20161026211442.GB1752@linux.intel.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1610262314180.5013@nanos>
References: <1477142405-32078-1-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com> <1477142405-32078-11-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1610261451060.4983@nanos> <20161026211442.GB1752@linux.intel.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, 26 Oct 2016, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 03:02:56PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > +	list_for_each(l, &r->domains) {
> > > +		d = list_entry(l, struct rdt_domain, list);
> > 
> > So above you converted to list_for_each_entry(). Is there a sensible
> > reason, aside of being sloppy, why is this still using list_for_each()?
> 
> We use list_for_each() because we want to get the list_head "l". The l
> is used to find the position that the new domain will be inserted.

Sorry. I completely missed that position information thingy. No change
required then.

> The following patch #10 is supposed to fix issues you pointed out above.
> 
> Is it good now?

Looks fine. 

Thanks,

	tglx